Philippines set for ‘more robust' Balikatan joint drills, but no mention of Typhon
The Philippines is gearing up for its biggest joint military exercise this year, aimed at enhancing its defence capabilities, with observers suggesting Manila should still showcase a controversial US-made missile system that Beijing is firmly against.
Advertisement
Without giving detailed information on the dates and number of soldiers slated to join the drills, Brigadier General Michael Logico, Balikatan's executive agent, said last week that the 40th Balikatan exercises would be a full battle test.
'There will be participation coming from the Australian Defence Force and the Japanese Self Defence Force,' Logico told reporters at a briefing after a live fire exercise last week in Capas, Tarlac, adding he was waiting for 'newer developments from other countries' before giving further details on this year's Balikatan.
Like last year, the drills will feature sinking exercises 12 nautical miles outside the Philippines' territorial waters.
The Typhon missile system was deployed in the Philippines during the first phase of the Salaknib exercise in April of last year and used in the Balikatan joint exercises the following month.
Advertisement
Muhammad Faizal Bin Abdul Rahman, a research fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, told This Week in Asia the coming Balikatan drills would continue to serve as a deterrent against China along the first island chain, where Philippine interests in the South China Sea and the security of the Taiwan Strait were implicitly linked.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Asia Times
3 hours ago
- Asia Times
American protectionism hands China the future
Subscribe now with a one-month trial for only $1, then enjoy the first year at an exclusive rate of just $99. Deal with China is not yet done Scott Foster analyzes the latest developments in US-China trade talks, highlighting Donald Trump's exaggerated claims of victory despite an unfinished deal. While a tentative framework was reached in London, China appears to have gained leverage. Ukraine in strategic crisis as ceasefire hopes fade James Davis analyzes the intensifying aerial war between Russia and Ukraine, highlighting Ukraine's drone attacks on Russian airfields. Meanwhile, Zelensky is intensifying lobbying in Washington, attempting to politically box in Trump by portraying him as soft on Russia. SPD's peace manifesto signal fracture in German security policy Diego Faßnacht analyzes a growing intra-party revolt within Germany's center-left SPD, where over 100 prominent figures have released a policy manifesto demanding a diplomatic reset with Russia and a sharp turn away from NATO's militarization path.
Asia Times
8 hours ago
- Asia Times
The power calculus driving Trump's tariffs
Despite dire predictions that US President Donald Trump's foreign policy, dominated by real and threatened manipulations of American tariffs and trade practices, US inflation rates and other measures of American economic vigor do not yet give cause for alarm. Indeed, at this writing US-China trade talks seem productive enough so that spokespersons for the European Union say they hope their trade talks take on a similar format. Trump's approach to tariffs has been anything but static—shifting abruptly like a spotlight sweeping across a stage. Yet beneath the political theater lies a calculated strategy with far-reaching implications. While critics assume tariffs invariably raise consumer prices, the reality is more nuanced. Trump's policies appear designed not just for economic leverage but as an extension of his foreign policy vision, particularly in Asia and the Western Hemisphere. Whether this constitutes strategic brilliance or overreach is debatable, but the mechanics of tariffs—and who ultimately bears their cost—demand closer scrutiny. The impact of a tariff hinges on market dynamics, competition and geopolitical leverage. Consider a US$100 product imported from Country X. If the US imposes a $25 tariff, the seller faces a choice: absorb the cost by cutting their price to $75 (keeping the consumer's total at $100) or pass the expense to buyers and risk losing market share. In competitive markets—like coffee from Colombia, Brazil, or Mexico—sellers often absorb tariffs to retain customers. But the calculus shifts when alternatives are scarce. A monopolist, such as OPEC in the oil markets, can dictate prices precisely because competitors lack the capacity to undercut them without facing ruin. This imbalance of power invites broader consequences: nations disadvantaged by such asymmetries may resort to political or even military retaliation, as nearly occurred during the 1970s oil crises. Tariffs also reshape local economies. A Mexican manufacturer facing US tariffs might offset losses by raising prices for domestic consumers or slashing wages. A Canadian auto supplier could lobby for government subsidies to preserve jobs while lowering export prices. Meanwhile, China's state-influenced exporters might reduce prices to maintain access to the elastic US market, repurposing tariff revenue for Chinese domestic projects. Trump's tariffs align with a modern revival of the Monroe Doctrine, which asserts US hegemony in the Western Hemisphere. Recent maneuvers, such as discouraging Chinese influence over the Panama Canal, signal that the administration views tariffs as both economic tools and geopolitical signals. The message is clear: the US will enforce its sphere of influence, and trade policy is one lever to do so. It is possible to imagine Trump's 'super big picture' plan as a compressed version (spanning three years) of the 150-year evolution of the British Empire, beginning with Mercantilism and culminating in free trade. At first, Trump treats the rest of the world as composed of client states, whose economies are tied tightly together with the 'mother ship', the dependent states all at first directed by force majeure to contribute to the greatness of the Metropolitan Authority. Later on, when the dependencies have grown to maturity, a managed form of free trade emerges, and wealth becomes more widely shared. Ultimately, outcomes will be determined by raw power—economic, military and diplomatic. While Trump's aggressive posture may yield short-term gains, inconsistency risks undermining his objectives. China, the primary challenger to this strategy, may currently perceive his actions as domestically focused rather than existential. But if tariffs become an erratic flicker rather than a steady beam, the US could squander its leverage. In an era where trade is war by other means, Trump's tariffs are less about economics than they are about reasserting American primacy. The question isn't whether the world will adapt—it's who will blink first.
RTHK
a day ago
- RTHK
US personnel 'are being moved out of Middle East'
US personnel 'are being moved out of Middle East' A Marine keeps an eye out for potential trouble at the US embassy in Baghdad. File photo: AFP The sixth round of US-Iran nuclear talks will be held on Sunday in Muscat, the Omani foreign minister said on Thursday, after US President Donald Trump reiterated that Tehran would not be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. Trump said on Wednesday US personnel were being moved out of the Middle East because "it could be a dangerous place". The United States has been reported as preparing an evacuation of its Iraqi embassy and allowing military dependents to leave locations around the Middle East due to heightened security risks in the region, according to US and Iraqi sources. The four US and two Iraqi sources did not say what security risks had prompted the decision. Reports of the potential evacuation pushed up oil prices by more than 4 percent before prices eased on Thursday. Foreign energy companies were continuing their operations as usual, a senior Iraqi official overseeing operations in southern oilfields said on Thursday. A US official said the State Department had authorized voluntary departures from Bahrain and Kuwait. The State Department updated its worldwide travel advisory on Wednesday evening to reflect the latest US posture. "On June 11, the Department of State ordered the departure of non-emergency US government personnel due to heightened regional tensions," the advisory said. The decision to evacuate some personnel comes at a volatile moment in the region. Trump's efforts to reach a nuclear deal with Iran appear to be deadlocked and US intelligence indicates that Israel has been making preparations for a strike against Iran's nuclear facilities. "They are being moved out because it could be a dangerous place, and we'll see what happens," Trump said. "We've given notice to move out." Asked whether anything could be done to lower the temperature in the region, Trump said: "They can't have a nuclear weapon. Very simple, they can't have a nuclear weapon." Trump has repeatedly threatened to strike Iran if stuttering talks over its nuclear programme fail and in an interview released earlier on Wednesday said he was growing less confident that Tehran would agree to stop enriching uranium, a key American demand. While the evacuation of non-essential personnel raised concerns about a possible regional escalation, a senior Iranian security official told Iran's Press TV on Thursday that US military dependents leaving did not constitute a threat. On Wednesday, Iran's defence minister warned Washington that Tehran would hit US regional bases if drawn into a war in the case of nuclear talks failing. The United States has a military presence across the major oil-producing region, with bases in Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. (Reuters)
